coolify_list_projects

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are provided, so the description carries full burden. It accurately describes the tool as a read-only listing operation returning a summary. No behavioral quirks (e.g., pagination, filtering) are mentioned, but for a simple list with no parameters, this is sufficiently transparent.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Single sentence, front-loaded with the tool's purpose and return value. No wasted words; every part of the description earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list operation with no parameters and no output schema, the description is complete. It states what is returned (summary fields). Could optionally mention that the output is a list of objects, but this is implied by 'List all projects'. The description provides enough context for an agent to use the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has zero parameters, so schema coverage is 100% and the description adds no parameter detail. With 0 parameters, the baseline is 4, and the description does not need to add anything further.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

Description clearly states the tool lists all projects in Coolify and specifies the summary fields returned (uuid, name, description). The verb 'list' and resource 'projects' are specific and distinct from sibling list tools that target different resources.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. While the usage is straightforward, a sentence like 'Use this for a quick overview of all projects; for detailed info on a specific project, use coolify_get_project' would improve clarity. The current description implies usage but does not provide exclusions or alternatives.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.